[poly 1 0] means that until its note is released, all incoming notes between onset and offset of the only voice's note should be completely invisible to it (that's what "one-voice polyphony with no voice stealing" should mean, I think). I don't think it should suddenly output the values of another note that happened to have been depressed and held in the meantime. I think what you're looking for is something different from the voice allocation in [poly]; you're looking more for assigning note priority in monophonic instruments. If I'm understanding you correctly, in order to do what you want with [poly], you would need to manage a very large internal polyphony to keep track of all the potential voices that could be being sustained when a voice receives a note off.

On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 4:47 AM, William Huston <williamahuston@gmail.com> wrote:

Sorry, Sourceforge is blocked for me.

I noticed that when using [poly 1 0] (note stealing off)
when I would smash multi-note chords and release notes,
sometimes I would be left pressing a note,
yet the output of [poly] is silence.

I thought this might be a bug with the Windows MIDI driver,
but it is definitely a bug with [poly], because with higher
values of N, [poly N 0] knows the correct notes
remaining.

See attached ZIP file.
There is an HTML+image included which explains
how to run the patch to demonstrate the issue.

The problem is there is a race condition.
Lets say you smash the following chord:
("smash" means play all notes as simultaneously as possible)

24 26 28 29 31 33 [C-D-E-F-G-A]

Now the value which will be latched by [poly 1 0] is random.
Let's say it is 28.

Now we release 33, 31,29 .... ALL GOOD!
Now release 29.
NOTE 24, 26, 28 are still depressed!
[poly] doesn't know what to do here, and releases 28, ALL NOTES OFF. Yet I am still holding down 3 notes.

The problem here is how do deal with this condition is ambiguous.
Should [poly] have "highest note value" priority? (and jump to 26)
Or "lowest note value" priority? (and jump to 24)
Or "order received" priority? (and jump to to the latest received of [24,26])
Or maybe "reverse order received" priority? (and jump to the earliest received of [24,26])
I would request a feature enhancement to provide some way to set
the mode of poly (new inlet, message to inlet1, and/or starting parameter) to chose one of these four modes.

In the meantime, I think I can code my own version of what I need as an abstraction.

Thanks Miller and everyone who contributes here for such an awesome tool/toy!

BH
--
--
May you, and all beings
be happy and free from suffering :)
-- ancient Buddhist Prayer (Metta)

_______________________________________________
Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list